Just because a lot of illogical things have happened in the first four weeks does not mean that trend will continue forever.

There is certainly a perfect storm brewing for a big game at Carolina. The Seahawks ultra conservative gameplan has backfired in games 3 and 4. Too many of Wilson's throws are on 3rd down. That is not protecting your QB. By going with a run-run-pass strategy, they are not allowing Wilson to easily establish a rhythm. Pete is not stupid, and I think by now he has probably recognized this problem and is making changes to the gameplan.

Meanwhile, this is a rare east coast game that doesn't start at 10am. Carolina has a terrible defense that runs the kind of porous zone defense that will give you flashbacks to the Seahawks zone coverages in 2009. Their pass rush is ordinary. The Seahawks have played four good defenses in the first four games. This defense is probably the worst they will face all season.

I see a good game for Wilson, with a very high completion rate, and probably over 200 yards passing. I think Newton and Smith will score some points, and force the Seahawks into a faster paced game, which is generally where Wilson shines the brightest.

If I was a betting man I'd always bet against what this forum is most sure it sense's about the next game. No offense, but this forum was sure we'd destroy the Cards and Rams and just had mild optimism about the Cowboys and Packers.

Wilson having a good game? Maybe, this will be his easiest defense to do it against. Though I guarantee they're defense will give him the same looks that has given him problems that last 4 games, unless of course they have an ex-defensive coordinator from the Seahawks. I really doubt Carroll is going to take the training wheels off since Wilson has done nothing to earn it, the man is phobic about turnovers. Not taking advantage of the chances you are given doesn't create a lot of confidence.

I think a quarterback like Cam Newton needs to be given the exact same treatment that we gave Aaron Rogers in the first half of the MNF game. Let's unleash Clemons and Irvin on him early and often. Make him get rid of the ball or scramble. Sure, it could backfire on us in a couple of ways. They could run the ball down our throats or his scrambling ability might be better than what I think it is. But if I had a say in how we prepare defensively, I'd definately try to get to him as much as possible and as soon as possible. I'd put the over/under for sacks at 5 in this game. For Clemons, 2 sacks. 1.5 for Irvin. Someone else is going to step up too and get one or two. Let's test that young QB's arm/feet and mental/physical toughness and let's force them to use the running game. A grind-it-out game is what we want. That's our strong suit.

razor150 wrote:If I was a betting man I'd always bet against what this forum is most sure it sense's about the next game. No offense, but this forum was sure we'd destroy the Cards and Rams and just had mild optimism about the Cowboys and Packers.

Tech Worlds wrote:I sense we fall behind by 2 scores and then the pressure on Wilson really mounts.

In a twisted way, that might be good because it forces Pete to let 'Rusty' air it out. Good chance for quality reps at full speed between Wilson and WRS to establish timing and get used to one another's tendencies in the heat of battle. Gotta make up for the lack of reps in pre season somewhere.The Hawks have the weapons on D to give Kam and co. fits, so let's see how well they execute.

Hasselbeck wrote:[quote="firebee"]You're not benching a QB because it's a road game. You're benching a QB because he had a bad performance on a road game the game before a long road game to a place where that rookie QB is going to probably have distractions at home while he's in the area. The travel time and crowd at an away stadium isn't going to favor the rookie. You have a QB you paid big bucks for that's performed well as a situational starter in regular season games like this and he's looking to earn the start somewhere in the NFL before the end of his career, so a good performance in Carolina builds value in that QB, so you can trade him for a couple 1st round picks in a year or two. Even if Flynn performs well, we can start Wilson against New England in Seattle because Flynn would understand that Wilson is the future of this franchise and we're going to play him in games that are favorable to him being successful.

It's called putting your QB in the best situation to succeed in. That's how you build confidence in young QBs. That's the difference between an Eli Manning or Philip Rivers and a Matt Leinart or Trent Edwards. You don't put rookie QBs in situations that are heavily favored against them having a bad performance or losing a game, even if they have a good performance.

That's such an awful awful idea I really do not know where to begin.

You may be able to juggle QB's at the college ranks (even then, not a good idea) but not in the NFL.

Either we ride with Wilson.. accept the fact he's going to likely struggle (added frustration given how much talent is on this roster and how close we could be to contending with better play at QB). Or you replace him with Flynn and don't look back.

It's not Madden 13. You don't play musical chairs with the most important position on the field. What happens, if under your scenario, Flynn goes for 300 and 3? The first mistake Wilson has against NE.. guess what's going to happen?

If Flynn goes 300 yards for 3 TDs... Great!!! We're 3-2 heading home against a NE team that has a long way to travel and we're talking about Flynn starting against the Patriots based on his performance. If we choose to start Flynn against New England and he wins the game against New England with a good performance, maybe we extend his starts through SF and Detroit. You guys act like winning games with Flynn for a stretch is a bad thing.

Wilson got us to 2-2, but his performances have been lackluster and that's a reality. Letting Wilson take a breather and letting him get more comfortable with the offense while Flynn plays a stretch of games, as long as he's performing well and winning games isn't necessarily a bad thing for the development of Wilson or the Seahawks. If Flynn performs badly in Carolina, we start Wilson against New England at home and the team actually has more confidence in Wilson at QB because of Flynn's poor performance in Carolina. If Flynn performs well and wins, we look at extending his starts.

John Elway, Eli Manning, Drew Brees... All three of them split starts with another QB their rookie year. I'm afraid people, PC included, are making choices based on their desire for Wilson to perform well vs. the probability of Wilson performing well.

That and their dream will be squashed if Flynn performs well.[/quote] Birds of a feather nananananananana...

MrCarey wrote:Lol, you guys sense shit like this every week and you've been wrong every time.

We were going to annihilate Arizona's o-line. Russell Wilson was going to be throwing for 200+ and 3 TDs per game. Our defense wasn't going to give up on every 3rd and long.

Stop sensing things, guys! Just hope for the win and shhhhhhhhh! I think it's jinxing the players.

This. In fairness I've hoped the same thing every time. I want to at least have something to base an opinion of Russ on. I have this unexplainable desire for him to be the guy, more than I did for Flynn. I don't know why, but I hope at least he gets a shot to succeed or fail.

Their defense will be the weakest we have faced so far. However, they are at home and coming off a loss in the last few seconds. It won't be easy, but this is the time to let the offense open and show the league we aren't one dimensional.